web analytics


By David Vance On April 22nd, 2019

By Chris Morrison

It seems only appropriate that the recent BBC climate propaganda film featured not one but two fake Nobel prize laureates. As with almost all climate activism, science and a dedication to the truth has long departed the stage. Attenborough’s film mixed lies, half-truths unsupported statements and desperate emotion into something that passes for “settled” science in our increasingly uneducated times.

A gentle 270-year warming of about 1C from the little ice age lies behind all the climate tantrums and alarmism. From this one fact, the activist/scientists have gone on to invent over 100 climate models that forecast higher warming, sometimes as much as 6C. These models have been around for 30 years and not one has proved accurate. Frequent BBC contributor and Met Office head of climate monitoring Dr Peter Stott is always banging on about “extreme” temperatures and he did not disappoint this time out.

This would appear to be the same Peter Stott who claimed on his Met Office cv that he was a “co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize”. The claim was removed in February last year!

Another big contributor to the BBC eco party was an old friend Michael Mann – the chap who abolished the Medieval warming period and produced the fanciful hockey stick graph. Reviewing the BBC programme, the tenacious blogger Paul Homewood suggested that Mann’s comments about more bad weather were “maybe one of the most dishonest parts of the programme”.

This is the same Michael Mann who has also made false claims about being awarded a Nobel Prize. In the course of an American libel action against Mark Steyn, Mann suggested that it was one thing to engage in discussion about debatable topics but it was “quite another to attempt to discredit consistently validated scientific research through the professional and personal defamation of a Nobel Prize recipient”.

Where did Stott and Mann’s delusions arise from? – the Nobel, I mean, not climate science. And where did Mann get the idea that appropriating a Nobel made him immune to scientific questioning?

The “I’m a Nobel prize winner” scam started in 2007 when the United Nation’s IPCC was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Suddenly the CVs of numerous climate activists were padded with references to winning a Nobel (often minus the Peace bit) on the grounds that they had contributed to the IPCC climate reports.

At this stage, it should be noted that the Nobel Peace Prize is a political award decided by a Norwegian parliamentary committee. When the Cold War ended in 1990, the prize was awarded to Mikhail Gorbachev, not Ronald Reagan. Enough said.

Still, a Nobel is a Nobel – plus or minus the Peace tag – and by 2012 it seems the IPCC had had enough, deafened maybe by the thunderous laughter that greets every false claim. It noted:

“..the prize was awarded to the IPCC as an organisation, and not to any individual associated with the IPCC. Thus it is incorrect to refer to any IPCC official or scientists who worked on IPCC reports, as a Nobel laureate or Nobel prize winner”.

It’s all rather pathetic to see scientists who claim to work in an unbiased, apolitical profession running around claiming a political prize doled out by Norwegian lefties.

But while we can laugh at these antics, there is a very serious side to who is in and who is out in modern-day climate science. The BBC film made a remarkable claim that in the last three years, over a third of the world’s coral has first bleached then died. This ridiculous claim might have had something to do with a report by Professor Terry Hughes, the director of the “ARV Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies” at James Cooke University. Coral bleaching did occur during this period due to a very strong El Nino effect, a fact not mentioned in the programme.

Professor Peter Ridd, also of James Cooke University, has spent 40 years studying coral reefs and notes that coral bleaching is a regular event in nature. He observes that coral thrives in waters between 24C and 32C but bleaches when the water temperature rises suddenly. Spoiler alert – gentle global warming has little effect on coral reefs.

Time for a quiz.

Who recently got fired from James Cook University for public statements surrounding his coral reef views – Professor Ridd, the physics professor, or Professor Hughes, the chap with a PhD in “ecology”?

You guessed it – Peter Ridd, who has since won a historic court victory with the recent finding that he was wrongly dismissed by the Queensland University.

And finally a tale of two Davids.

David Attenborough, a BBC apparatchik to his fingertips, has taken to climate change as fast as a walrus falling off a cliff. And David Bellamy, a once popular figure on BBC with his entertaining and infectious programmes about habitat and wildlife. One day Bellamy, a botanist by trade, suggested that the preservation of habitat was far more important than the controversial theory of man-made climate change.

Car for David B, never to be seen again – and the award goes to …


  1. What is the ratio of Nobel Prize winners who accept Climate Change theory to Nobel Prize winners who dent it? Asking for a friend.

  2. One day Bellamy, a botanist by trade, suggested that the preservation of habitat was far more important than the controversial theory of man-made climate change.